• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Long-Serving Senators

Kal'Stang said:
I stopped reading when I read "The New World Order crowd".
Click to expand...

lol

The trilateral commission !
They are coming to get you.

I'm way more concerned about SC justices . They can't be voted out.

The maximum age limit should be something like 65.
 
KLATTU said:
lol

The trilateral commission !
They are coming to get you.

I'm way more concerned about SC justices . They can't be voted out.

The maximum age limit should be something like 65.
Click to expand...

How about must be able to pass USMC physical ?
 
In a perfect world they would have to take some kind of mental competency test every year, but we all know that wouldn't fly.
 
Bad idea. Sitting on the highest bench of the land is typically the apex of your legal career. If you forced people to step down at age 65, they'd likely only have been there a few years. Judicial independence would erode, as every new president would get to pick virtually the whole court anew.

Make it more like 80.
 
Flanders said:
Hillary was so bad she blew a walkover despite the help she got from the media. Even so, media still sells the lie that she won the popular vote.
Click to expand...

Hillary is full of smelly stuff. A large portion of American voters are angry because of the type of women the media promotes:

Hillary Clinton: Large Portion of U.S. ‘Uneasy,’ ‘Angry’ About Women Seeking Power
by Pam Key
11 May 2018

Hillary Clinton: Large Portion of U.S. 'Uneasy,' 'Angry' About Women Seeking Power | Breitbart​

On the bright side, the country dodged the bullet because then-Senator Hillary Clinton did not become a long-serving senator.
 
Flanders said:
To VanceMack: Media reelects them.

Long-serving senators like Ted Kennedy(1962 - 2009) is the best reason for repealing the XVII Amendment. He legislated and implemented more of his personal agenda than any five presidents you can name. He was the worst of a bad lot.

Kennedy had stiff competition for the title of WORST: J. William Fullbright (1945 - 1974) Joe Biden (1973 - 2009), John Kerry (1985 - 2013), Paul Sarbanes (1977 - 2007), Chris Dodd (1981 - 2011) Harry Reid (1987 - 2017) Chuck Schumer (1998 - Present) Carl Levin (1979 - 2015) Robert Byrd (1959 - 2010), Patrick Leahy (1975 - Present) Dick Durbin (1997 - Present). There are more including some Republicans.

Notice that only three sitting senators became president, while media considers every Democrat senator presidential timber. Obama had a Senate administration. Check the number of senators he appointed to key positions if you doubt me. Think about that when you look at the worst 8 years in the country’s history.

Put aside names and look at the institution itself.

Seven years after 1913, U.S. Senators were still loyal enough to put the country first. They refused to hand this country’s sovereignty to the League of Nations regardless of what Woodrow Wilson wanted. By the time the United Nations opened for business in 1945 the U.S. Senate had become a nest of traitors working for a one government world. By the time the XVII Amendment kicked in full-force with more and more long-serving senators those wonderful ELECTED senators could not hand this country’s sovereignty to the United Nations fast enough —— along with our national borders.

NOTE: The New World Order crowd realized that they could control the U.S. Senate easier, and a lot cheaper, than buying 435 members of the House every two years. The House supposedly controls the public purse, while the Senate has total control over treaties, ratifying cabinet members, ambassadors, bureaucrats, and impeachment trials. I know enough about these few U.S. Ambassadors to the U.N. the Senate ratified to see what is happening:

Adlai Stevenson
George H. W. Bush (He actually championed the New World Order.)
Daniel Patrick Moynihan
Andrew Young
Madeleine Albright
Bill Richardson
Richard Holbrooke (This character was a Peace Corps official.)
John Negroponte (This guy is an expert at International Affairs!)
Susan Rice (Affectional known as Suzy Five Shows.)
Samantha Power (The ugly truth about Obama advisor Samantha Power)
Click to expand...

The above post is bizarre on many levels. It nearly belongs in the conspiracy theory area with the "The New World Order crowd" nonsense.

It doesn't go unnoticed that the poster's "worst senators" all happen to be Democrats and two happen to be historic statesmen, Byrd and Kennedy.
 
MTAtech said:
It doesn't go unnoticed that the poster's "worst senators" all happen to be Democrats
Click to expand...

To MTAtech: I certainly hope liberals noticed!

MTAtech said:
and two happen to be historic statesmen, Byrd and Kennedy.
Click to expand...

To MTAtech: Richard Nixon was a respected elder statesman in the years after he left the White House; so maybe you should hold off on calling the King of Pork a statesman.

And you should be ashamed of yourself calling Ted Kennedy anything except a drunk afflicted with wet brain years before he died:

​
 
Flanders said:
To MTAtech: I certainly hope liberals noticed!



To MTAtech: Richard Nixon was a respected elder statesman in the years after he left the White House; so maybe you should hold off on calling the King of Pork a statesman.

And you should be ashamed of yourself calling Ted Kennedy anything except a drunk afflicted with wet brain years before he died:

​
Click to expand...

In the years after Nixon left the WH he was in exile, so I don't know what you are talking about.

Kennedy was a true statesmen -- and using Rush Blowhard Limbaugh as a news source says all we need to know about you.
 
Flanders said:
Senators are the deadliest creatures in the swamp; the longer they serve the deadlier they become:

SNIP!

"I recently had a terrific meeting with a bipartisan group of freshman lawmakers who feel very strongly in favor of Congressional term limits," Trump tweeted. "I gave them my full support and endorsement for their efforts. #DrainTheSwamp."[/INDENT]

SNIP!

Trump: Push for Congressional Term Limits Has My 'Full Support and Endorsement' [/INDENT][/INDENT][/INDENT]

President Trump must have read an article by Jon Hall who recently made the case for a Constitutional Convention and term limits. Hall’s piece was different than most in that he called for repealing the XVII Amendment:

October 10, 2017
Repairing the U.S. Senate
By Jon N. Hall

Repairing the U.S. Senate​

If Trump wants to be serious about term limits he can begin by using his bully pulpit to repeal the:

XVII AMENDMENT
​

The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, elected by the people thereof, for six years; and each Senator shall have one vote. The electors in each State shall have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the State legislatures.

When vacancies happen in the representation of any State in the Senate, the executive authority of such State shall issue writs of election to fill such vacancies: Provided, That the legislature of any State may empower the executive thereof to make temporary appointments until the people fill the vacancies by election as the legislature may direct.

This amendment shall not be so construed as to affect the election or term of any Senator chosen before it becomes valid as part of the Constitution.
​

Make no mistake about repeal’s formidable enemies:

1. The New World Order crowd.

2. Television.

Television does the dirty work for the New World Order crowd; so that makes TV the most destructive of the two.

Every senator runs for election/reelection once every 6 years. Winners AND LOSERS advertise. Assume every Senate candidate spends a minimum of one million dollars on television advertising. That amounts to television raking in approximately 200 billion tax-deductible advertising dollars every six years. My best guesstimate says that television will pocket a TRILLION advertising tax dollars in 12 years after you add in House races, three presidential elections, governors, and an assortment of state and local races. Now ask yourself “Who in hell is paying for all of the political campaign bullcrap filling up air time in-between product advertising?” The answer is “ME”.

Realistically speaking, there is not much chance the XVII Amendment will be repealed. Eliminating the advertising tax deduction is a good compromise because it will blow television out of political influence. The beautiful part is that the First Amendment is not violated. The bad part is that eliminating the advertising tax deduction has less chance of being eliminated than does repealing the 17th Amendment.

Finally, doing away with the crooks in the Senate was the XVII Amendment’s main selling point before 1913. In fact, the 17th gave the country the worst of all worlds —— long-serving crooks and U.N.-loving traitors.

Worse than crooks and traitors the XVII Amendment has been conning Americans into believing they are better off living in a democracy. Like the man said:

Democracy is a pathetic belief in the collective wisdom of individual ignorance. H. L. Mencken
​

p.s. There is a long-running challenge to 16th & 17th Amendments supported by evidence:

1. The Sixteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution was declared ratified. The income tax amendment. It clearly was not.

2. The Seventeenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution was declared ratified. It clearly was not.
​

National Archives
Seventeenth Amendment
By: Devvy Kidd
March 2010

Devvy Kidd -- National Archives — The Seventeenth Amendment — March, 2010​
Click to expand...

Arguments about ratification aside, I think the 17th Amendment was a huge mistake for state power. Having the state legislatures vote on senators was the original and I think best approach. Popular vote has its problems. State power back in the Senate is what's needed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom